Auf ein Miniaturbild klicken, um zu Google Books zu gelangen.
Lädt ... Pure Baseball: Pitch by Pitch for the Advanced Fan (1994)von Keith Hernandez
Keine Lädt ...
Melde dich bei LibraryThing an um herauszufinden, ob du dieses Buch mögen würdest. Keine aktuelle Diskussion zu diesem Buch. Zeige 2 von 2 keine Rezensionen | Rezension hinzufügen
Written by one of the most skillful and intelligent players in baseball, this book analyzes the game for the serious fan, and shows how to watch for and understand every detail, from the action in the bullpen, to a pause before a pitch, to a play at the plate. Keine Bibliotheksbeschreibungen gefunden. |
Aktuelle DiskussionenKeineBeliebte Umschlagbilder
Google Books — Lädt ... GenresMelvil Decimal System (DDC)796.357The arts Recreational and performing arts Athletic and outdoor sports and games Ball sports Ball and stick sports BaseballKlassifikation der Library of Congress [LCC] (USA)BewertungDurchschnitt:
Bist das du?Werde ein LibraryThing-Autor. |
The book proclaims itself to be for the advanced fan, which I clearly am not. I still got a huge amount from it, although I had to puzzle over some phraseology that would be natural to a more seasoned spectator. (It could easily be made more accessible, though, with a glossary and rule summary at the back). It also got more complex as the book wore on - commendably, Hernandez assumes that you have learnt what he told you previously in the book.
But, boy, is it dense! Hernandez doesn't waste many words on much that isn't pretty directly related to some facet of baseball, with that facet directly related to what is happening in the game at the point he's currently describing. I found at times that I had to limit how much I read without losing concentration.
It was written about 20 years ago, so I'm sure loads has changed, but perhaps not. It also doesn't mention any of the doping scandals that plagued the sport, but I don't know whether this is because the book is from a prior era (I don't think so), through wilful bowlderisation of history, editorial judgement, avoidance of being sued, or not wanting to piss off his colleagues.
There is a little bit of self-puffery here, but not enough for me to find objectionable. He also seems happy to let you know when he's guessed wrong, when it would have been easy to fix what he said (I don't know, maybe some of that did go on, but I didn't get that sense). It's opinionated too - he's happy to say when he disagrees with conventional wisdom.
So for all that, and for this reader, it is probably a book to reread. I got it from the library, but would definitely like to buy a copy to refer to.
Probably the best sports book I've ever read. ( )